“Our Way of Life is not up for Negotiation!”: Climate Interventions in the Shadow of ‘Societal Security’

Duncan P McLaren, Olaf Corry
{"title":"“Our Way of Life is not up for Negotiation!”: Climate Interventions in the Shadow of ‘Societal Security’","authors":"Duncan P McLaren, Olaf Corry","doi":"10.1093/isagsq/ksad037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n ‘Climate security’ conventionally refers to climate change being a multiplier of threats to national security, international peace and stability, or human security. Here we identify a hitherto overlooked inverted climate security discourse in which climate responses (rather than climate impacts) are held to pose an existential threat to dominant fossil fuel-dependent ‘ways of life’, justifying extraordinary measures—societal climate security. In doing so, we seek to make three novel contributions. First, we set out how societal securitization applies beyond a national frame and in relation to transnational threats like climate change, arguing it promotes not just exceptional measures but also palliative ones that avoid challenging incumbent identities. Second, we draw on recent evidence and extant literatures to show that 'societal climate security' already has substantial material emanations in the form of exceptional measures, deployed domestically against climate protestors and externally against climate migrants, in the name of societal order and cohesion. Third, we turn to wider climate policy implications, arguing that societal securitization tilts policy agendas further away from rapid mitigation pathways and toward promissory measures such as ‘geoengineering’—schemes for future, large-scale technological interventions in the climate system—that may appear less threatening to established societal identities. While there are sound ecological and humanitarian rationales to research such technologies, in the context of societal securitization these can be appropriated to defend dominant ‘ways of life’ instead. To conclude, we reflect on how, were it attempted, deployment of solar geoengineering for societal security would affect security politics more widely.","PeriodicalId":380017,"journal":{"name":"Global Studies Quarterly","volume":"239 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksad037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

‘Climate security’ conventionally refers to climate change being a multiplier of threats to national security, international peace and stability, or human security. Here we identify a hitherto overlooked inverted climate security discourse in which climate responses (rather than climate impacts) are held to pose an existential threat to dominant fossil fuel-dependent ‘ways of life’, justifying extraordinary measures—societal climate security. In doing so, we seek to make three novel contributions. First, we set out how societal securitization applies beyond a national frame and in relation to transnational threats like climate change, arguing it promotes not just exceptional measures but also palliative ones that avoid challenging incumbent identities. Second, we draw on recent evidence and extant literatures to show that 'societal climate security' already has substantial material emanations in the form of exceptional measures, deployed domestically against climate protestors and externally against climate migrants, in the name of societal order and cohesion. Third, we turn to wider climate policy implications, arguing that societal securitization tilts policy agendas further away from rapid mitigation pathways and toward promissory measures such as ‘geoengineering’—schemes for future, large-scale technological interventions in the climate system—that may appear less threatening to established societal identities. While there are sound ecological and humanitarian rationales to research such technologies, in the context of societal securitization these can be appropriated to defend dominant ‘ways of life’ instead. To conclude, we reflect on how, were it attempted, deployment of solar geoengineering for societal security would affect security politics more widely.
“我们的生活方式没有商量的余地!”:“社会保障”阴影下的气候干预
“气候安全”通常是指气候变化对国家安全、国际和平与稳定或人类安全的威胁倍增器。在这里,我们发现了一个迄今为止被忽视的颠倒的气候安全话语,其中气候反应(而不是气候影响)被认为对主要依赖化石燃料的“生活方式”构成了生存威胁,证明了采取特殊措施——社会气候安全是合理的。在这样做的过程中,我们寻求做出三个新颖的贡献。首先,我们阐述了社会证券化如何超越国家框架,并与气候变化等跨国威胁有关,认为它不仅促进了特殊措施,而且还促进了避免挑战现有身份的缓和措施。其次,我们利用最近的证据和现有的文献表明,“社会气候安全”已经以特殊措施的形式产生了实质性的影响,以社会秩序和凝聚力的名义在国内针对气候抗议者和外部针对气候移民。第三,我们转向更广泛的气候政策影响,认为社会证券化使政策议程进一步远离快速缓解途径,而倾向于承诺措施,如“地球工程”——未来大规模技术干预气候系统的计划——可能对既定社会身份的威胁较小。虽然研究这些技术有良好的生态和人道主义理由,但在社会证券化的背景下,这些技术可以被用来捍卫占主导地位的“生活方式”。最后,我们思考了太阳能地球工程在社会安全领域的应用将如何更广泛地影响安全政治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信